Nightlion wrote: Maybe it serves as great purpose to suspend everything in an alternate dimension while he collapses and expands a new generation heavens and earth(s) (without number).
Would it take 15 billion years to collapse all things? I am guessing no.
The Nobel Prize for physics this year went to a group of scientists who discovered that the universe is not only NOT collapsing, it is actually accelerating outward.
What does that mean? It's a mystery. You may find some symbolic relevance to this. Which is fine. Just rememeber when you do that it is on the shoulders of scientific giants you stand.
There's a reason I don't drink prophetic Kool-Aid anymore, Nightlion. Remove the flowery speech and vague association and one can see where the substance begins and ends. I have much more admiration for the men who can make an amazing discovery such as this, and see the scientific community engage in it's own lack of understanding and pronounce, "It is good."
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
honorentheos wrote: God isn't required to create potential. Potential for change exists in a universe where instability exists.
LOL. instability? where in all the laws of nature is instability allowed?
A 1st grade level experiment for you, my friend. Hold your bladder. See how stable that particular system is. Return and report how long you lasted in this "stable" condition.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
What do you mean nothing differentiates God from the other no-things? You infer the opposite of what I said. I said that the other no-things (laws) could not resist but to cause perpetual creation and could have no beginning. Were as God can initiate a beginning and an end. He may chose to roll from one eternity to another. At will. What is not different there.?
The point, my friend, is that you haven't answered any questions by reverting back to this statement. We are now just saying "God" however we wish to define him/her/it is an author and wills change. Your statement about the laws of nature is basically meaningless. The fact is, the laws of nature DO cause perpetual creation in that everything is always changing. It's just a fact. So we have change. Granted. As the Germans say, "Ja, und?"
If you say "God can..." I say, "And your evidence for this is?" You are basically suggesting that God can do things differently than what we are observing. I'm asking you on what ground can you jutify this statement?
You are steamrolling over me by taking over my mind and saying for me that I said God can do things differently than what we are observing. Relax. What YOU are observing is very much different from what I am observing. Given the fact that you agree with Science, I agree with true religion. I observe a great deal that you will never notice. I have experience the existence of an alternate dimension here in the same time and space. That is a direct observation by sensual perception when a specific event made that possible. You cannot share that observation as I cannot share a belief in linear logic of evolution's convoluted unobserved but somehow ranked sorting hierarchy of the decent of man.
I know the skeptic rants until all play remains in his domain of consensus by consensus. But truth is where you find it. I am not an unwilling learner. I fear no truth. If my notion of God ever fouled what I observe I can change my mind. Not to deny God, I know him too well, but I do not know all things. I have enjoyed a radical change of my theology in just the last couple of years. That, after forty years of constant thought about it.
Nightlion wrote: LOL. instability? where in all the laws of nature is instability allowed?
A 1st grade level experiment for you, my friend. Hold your bladder. See how stable that particular system is. Return and report how long you lasted in this "stable" condition.
We are speaking to the creation of the matrix of the universe and not my private parts, thank you.
Nightlion wrote:I know the skeptic rants until all play remains in his domain of consensus by consensus. But truth is where you find it. I am not an unwilling learner. I fear no truth. If my notion of God ever fouled what I observe I can change my mind. Not to deny God, I know him too well, but I do not know all things. I have enjoyed a radical change of my theology in just the last couple of years. That, after forty years of constant thought about it.
If this is the case, I would strongly, STRONGLY, recommend reading the book, "Your Inner Fish". I don't think it will need to change your mind about God, but I would be very surprised to hear it doesn't change your views on evolution.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
A 1st grade level experiment for you, my friend. Hold your bladder. See how stable that particular system is. Return and report how long you lasted in this "stable" condition.
We are speaking to the creation of the matrix of the universe and not my private parts, thank you.
All systems operate by reason of instability. It wouldn't be a system if there weren't instability internal to the system. Systems fall apart because of external instability. If this example quoted above is crass, it is also effective in that the discomfort the experiment would cause would be undeniable. Discomfort can be a powerful motivator for change, another example of instability.
Instability and change are as constant as anything gets. Whether by God or nature, it's the way things are.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth? ~ Eiji Yoshikawa
Nightlion wrote:I know the skeptic rants until all play remains in his domain of consensus by consensus. But truth is where you find it. I am not an unwilling learner. I fear no truth. If my notion of God ever fouled what I observe I can change my mind. Not to deny God, I know him too well, but I do not know all things. I have enjoyed a radical change of my theology in just the last couple of years. That, after forty years of constant thought about it.
If this is the case, I would strongly, STRONGLY, recommend reading the book, "Your Inner Fish". I don't think it will need to change your mind about God, but I would be very surprised to hear it doesn't change your views on evolution.
What? This shows us like tadpoles in the womb? Not impressed. My imagination is well developed and I can think myself out of every evolution corner invented that I ever heard of. You guys belittle faith thinking that it uncorks and drains away when confronted by the fluff of the vain fables of men. False, unaccomplished, unlearned, inexperienced faith is no faith at all and is driven by the wind and tossed. You relish the float-sum that passes by these parts, I know.
Here I do not even get to begin with all the substantial spirituality I could show. I grovel to no end.
Nightlion wrote:We are speaking to the creation of the matrix of the universe and not my private parts, thank you.
All systems operate by reason of instability. It wouldn't be a system if there weren't instability internal to the system. Systems fall apart because of external instability. If this example quoted above is crass, it is also effective in that the discomfort the experiment would cause would be undeniable. Discomfort can be a powerful motivator for change, another example of instability.
Instability and change are as constant as anything gets. Whether by God or nature, it's the way things are.
You need to witness my second suggested video about quantum physics. Change happens but is wonderfully controlled by laws that demand balance and order. Light can change to matter and back to energy or light. But a state of instability is not allowed. in cosmic events. I think that is where the discussion should remain. Biology is another matter.